9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. - The Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar has filed this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order dated 29.12.2006 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CESTAT'), in which it is stated that in the present appeal from the facts and circumstances of the case, the following substantial question of law arises from the order of the Appellate Tribunal for consideration of this Court:- "Whether the manufacturer of final products is entitled to deemed credit under Notification 58/97-CE dated 30.8.1997 when the manufacturer-supplier of inputs has not paid Central Excise duty and given a wrong certificate/no cert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (Appeals). Vide its order dated 25.11.2004, the Commissioner (Appeals) while following the decision of this Court in Vikas Pipe Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-II, 2003(158) ELT 680 (P H) had allowed the appeal of the assessee and set aside the orders in original dated 12.08.2004 while observing as under:- "The issue involved in this case is denial of deemed modvat credit to the appellants on the ground that the manufacturer of inputs had not discharged the full duty liability. I observe that in terms of provisions of notification no.58/97-CE dated 30.08.97 credit of deemed duty paid by manufacturer under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is available subject to the condition that the inputs are received direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, the aforesaid question which arises from the order of Tribunal is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department holding that the assessee in the circumstances of the present case is entitled to the benefit of Modvat credit." 5. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Department filed an appeal before the CESTAT. Vide its order dated 29.12.2006, the CESTAT dismissed the appeal of the Department while observing as under:- "In this case, the respondents availed deemed credit under Notification no.58/97-CE(NT) dated 30.8.97 on the strength of invoices issued by the manufacturer of inputs. The contention of Revenue is that on verification, it was found that input manufacturer had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
